I cannot read it and agree with claims that peer review “is broken” and does not work. Such claims are at best oversimplifying the problems and selectively excluding evidence.
Peer review
Label-free single-cell proteomics
Recently, Matthias Mann and colleagues published a preprint (doi: 10.1101/2020.12.22.423933v1) reporting a label-free mass-spectrometry method for single-cell proteomics. Many colleagues asked me what I think about the preprint, and I summarized a few comments in the peer review below. I did not examine all aspects of the work, but I hope my comments are useful: … Continue reading Label-free single-cell proteomics
Evaluating preprints
I am hugely enthusiastic for communicating research by preprints. So naturally, I am happy to see when the president and strategic advisers of one of the most elite funding institutes embraces preprints: https://twitter.com/slavovLab/status/1095734247384641541 For centuries, publishing a scientific article was just about sharing the results. More recently, publishing research articles in a journal has served … Continue reading Evaluating preprints
Which publications are citable?
The number of references to a scientific publication is frequently used as an objective measure for the significance of the publication. This metric is far less precise than it may appear and in the short/medium-term it certainly fails to capture the most visionary and creative research. Consider, for example, that the publications of Richard Feynman … Continue reading Which publications are citable?
High quality journals with low quality peer-reviews
There is much outcry about the increasing competition in scientific research. Yet, I do not hear comparable outcry about the increasing competition in the Olympic 100-meters dash. I see competition as a very powerful driving force; whether it drives positive or negative changes depends on our metrics and the system. Unlike the metrics for the Olympic … Continue reading High quality journals with low quality peer-reviews
Papers that triumphed over their rejections
Kary Mullis: I knew PCR would spread across the world like wild fire. This time there was no doubt in my mind: Nature would publish it. They rejected it. So did Science ... Fuck them, I said
Tell me about the science, not the prizes!
One might introduce Egas Moniz as the great Nobel laureate and Dmitri Mendeleev as a chemist with few great awards. Much more informatively, however, one should introduce Egas Moniz as an influential protagonist of lobotomy and Dmitri Mendeleev as the co-inventor of the periodic table of elements.
Slavov Lab Blog 